Follow by Email

Proper Sacrifices -- A Lectionary Reflection

During the two wars that America has
fought in the first decade of the 21st century, few sacrifices were
asked of the American people as a whole.
Young men and women volunteered for military duty and put themselves in harm’s
way. Some did so out of a sense of
patriotic duty, while others saw the military as a means of improving their lot
in life – though knowing that there was risk involved. But for the rest of us, nothing was
asked. The United States government paid
for these wars on a credit card. For the
first time in American history, taxes were cut rather than raised during a time
of war.

What does any of this have to do with the lectionary readings
for this week? Well, neither military
nor tax policy are present in the texts, so that can’t be the focus. But there is the question of sacrifice
present in each text, though at points its presence is subtle rather
direct. The question then becomes -- what am I willing
to sacrifice for the good of the other -- my family, my community, the
world? Indeed, what am I willing to sacrifice for my
own good? After all, I am called to love
my neighbor as I love myself. And how
should I perceive the sacrifice that Jesus is said to have made on the
cross?

I’ve chosen to focus this week on
the reading from Ruth 1. It’s a story
that many are familiar with. Naomi, a
Hebrew, a resident of Bethlehem during the time of the judges, migrated to Moab
with her husband and two sons, due to a famine in the land. This isn’t the first time that a people has
been forced by weather or politics to migrate, and it wasn’t the last. Naomi’s ancestors had moved to Egypt for the
very same reason. Her descendants would
be forced to migrate due to political considerations. While in Moab, her husband died, leaving her
with two sons. They married Moabite
women, suggesting that they intended to settle down in this foreign land. But, before long, they die leaving their
mother and their wives Orpah and Ruth behind having to fend for
themselves. It’s at this time that
Naomi, realizing that she had no one to support her and her family, and hearing
that there was food back home, she contemplated migrating once again. The three women and possibly a few children
as well, begin the journey. Naomi,
realizing that she couldn’t provide for her daughters-in-law told them to
return to their homes and perhaps they, being young, could find suitable
husbands. Neither of the younger women
wanted to do this, though in time Naomi persuaded Orpah to return home. The
story goes on without Orpah, but we shouldn’t forget her in our movement
forward. Orpah did as she was asked,
though she was saddened by the request.
She made a sacrifice, believing that her return home would benefit not
only herself but Naomi, who would no longer feel the burden of an extra person
to care for. Besides, who knew how they
would be received back in Bethlehem.

Ruth chose to continue the journey with
Naomi, and it involved sacrifices as well.
I would assume that the move cut her off from her own family of origin
(and that may have already been true through her marriage to a foreigner). But notice how Ruth replies to Naomi. She puts her own life and future in the hands
of Naomi, who at this point doesn’t know how she’ll fend for herself – “wherever
you go, I will go . . .” Not only that, she says – “Your people will be my
people.” In taking this journey with
Naomi, she exchanges her national/ethnic identity for that of Naomi. Surely that was a difficult choice. Finally, she told Naomi – “your God will be
my God.” She exchanges her faith for
that of her mother-in-law. And remember that
in context one’s allegiance to a particular god/God defined one’s
identity. All of this represents a
sacrifice – could we call it a proper sacrifice. She laid down her life for another, in
support of that other person, and for that she was blessed and became a
blessing to many.

The reading from Hebrews speaks
directly to the question of sacrifice.
It’s a much different text from the Ruth text, for it speaks of the role
that Christ plays in the transformation of the sacrificial system. Jesus is not only the righteous high priest,
who has entered into the holy of holies to make sacrifice for the forgiveness
of sins, but he is himself that perfect sacrifice who once and for all “wash[es]
or consciences clean from dead works in order to serve the living God.” Again
we have what appear to be the building blocks of a penal substitution view of
atonement. God’s justice requires a
righteous victim to assuage God’s wrath, and Jesus performs that job. But, is that the intent. We don’t see a transactional effort here, but
instead a cleansing one. Even as the
baptismal waters are an appeal for a clean conscience, so Jesus’ own death
cleanses us, so that we might have a clean conscience. There is a concern for purification that
occurs through sacrifice, but it’s not a case of proper punishment – it’s
rather the proper means of cleansing that which is soiled. The differences may seem slight, but I think they
do change the way we envision God’s work in Jesus. For the Christian, Jesus becomes the focal
point of our connection to God, through the eternal Spirit. There is, it seems, at least an implicit hint
of a Trinitarian view of God, or at least it’s possible to find it there!

In the Gospel reading from Mark 12
we hear an exchange between a “legal expert” and Jesus about which commandment
is most important. If you have to
choose, which one would stand at the top of the list? Instead of laying out the Ten Commandments,
as Jesus does in a similar conversation with a wealthy young man, he turns to
Deuteronomy 6:1-9 (another lectionary text for the day), and pulls out what is
known as the Shema. “Israel, listen! Our God is the one Lord, and you must love the
Lord your God with all your heart, with all your being, with all your mind, and
with all your strength.” Jesus then adds a second concerning love of neighbor
that is drawn from another part of the Torah (Leviticus 19:18). The key phrase here comes not from Jesus’
summation, but the legal expert, who notes that Jesus has answered well –
noting that love of God and love of neighbor is “more important than all kinds
of entirely burned offerings and sacrifices” (12:33). Whatever value sacrifices have, and I don’t
think either Jesus or the legal expert would dismiss the value of the Temple
sacrifices and offerings, but both agree that they pale in comparison to the
command to love. And Jesus takes note of
the wisdom of the response saying “You aren’t far from God’s kingdom.”

A proper sacrifice, whatever its
nature, is rooted in one thing – love of God and neighbor. Ruth exemplified both expressions of
love. She showed love for God by
embracing Naomi’s God, pledging to live her life completely in relationship to
this God of Israel. But she also showed
love for Naomi, but devoting herself completely to Naomi’s welfare, so that not
even death would end her commitment, for “where you die, I will die, and there
I will be buried.” Nothing could
separate them, not even death. With
that, Naomi stopped talking about it!

Comments

I normally "haunt" Bruce's ponderings when I am trying to see how to tie the lectionary into today's times. I miss having him around Lancaster and feeling his presence around here and the opportunities to hear him speak and breathe new life into my own with his wisdom. So, after hurricane Sandy, once again, his writings are the first I turn to...this reading is wonderful and hits a few areas I didn't think about weaving into this week's sermon, but I was wondering how the recent experiences with Hurricane Sandy and the impact on our East coast could be woven in? Any thoughts? Speaking about sacrifice and loving neighbor (agape style) has to fit...but without sounding judgmental ... would discerning whether, out of love for our neighbors, we could discern what more we could offer (be it prayer, donating time or cash for something that is needed, etc.)

Elizabeth, thanks for stopping by. Any friend of Bruce's is a friend of mine!

As far as Sandy -- obviously if you're picking up on the Mark text, the emphasis on love of neighbor fits.

Ruth might be an interesting text to pursue as it brings together in ways I didn't think about until you asked the question -- the way in which friendship, deep friendship, emerges out of disasters. Ruth and Naomi only have each other to depend on, and yet in the midst of this they find hope.

So, perhaps a direction that could be taken with this is to pursue the importance of community -- how disasters like this one can pull people together.

Popular posts from this blog

On the Saturday following the inauguration of President Trump thousands of women (and male allies) from across the country gathered in Washington, D.C. (as well as many other cities across the land) to give voice to their concerns over the perceived direction of the new administration when it came to issues these women valued. This has led to a record number of women choosing to run for political office. There is a resurgent women’s movement in the land. Where it will lead no one knows, but there is growing chorus of voices that too often is drowned out by male voices that traditionally have dominated public and private discourse. What is true in the broader public, is true for the church.
As I picked up Erin Wathen’s book Resist and Persist,my first thought was the rallying cry that emerged after the Senate majority leader tried to shut down Senator Eli…

Proverbs 1:8-98 Listen, my son, to your father’s instruction and do not forsake your mother’s teaching.9 They are a garland to grace your head and a chain to adorn your neck. (NIV, 2011)

Today is Mother's Day, which celebrates a very special relationship between mother and child, and by extension - children and parents. Mother's Day, along with Father's Day, celebrates the importance of family, and it's a good thing to celebrate these relationships. But we should also remember that Jesus had a broader vision of family than do most of us. Do you remember what he said when his mother came looking for him? He pointed to his disciples and said: "Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." (Matthew 12:49-50). As we take to heart this word about family, we can then listen to the wisdom we find in Proverbs, which calls on us to listen to our parents and follow their instructions so that life…

Barton
Stone is one of the founding leaders of my denominational tradition. He is
known for having a less than orthodox view of the Trinity. In other words, he rejected
the concept whole cloth, in part because he found it to be confounding and
illogical. How do you have one God in three persons. Not only are the numbers
illogical but the idea, in his mind, was not biblical. You won’t find the term
Trinity in the Bible. You won’t find an explicit trinitarian formula. So, in
the interests of unity and decorum, he rejected the concept that had marked
Christian orthodoxy from at least the fourth century. Stone
wasn’t averse to talking about the Trinity and he didn’t make it a test of
fellowship, but what he had to say has lead later interpreters to be somewhat
confused. Was he an Arian? He definitely believed that the Son was subordinate
to the Father (as was also true of the Holy Spirit). He rejected the idea that
Christ existed from eternity—only the Father is self-exist…

I am a Disciples of Christ pastor, theologian, community activist, historian, teacher. I'm a graduate of Fuller Theological Seminary with a M.Div. and a Ph.D. in Historical Theology. I'm the author of a number of books including Marriage in Interesting Times (Energion, 2016) and Freedom in Covenant (Wipf and Stock, 2015).